home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!auvm!GITVM1.BITNET!CC100DB
- Message-ID: <921221.101525.EST.CC100DB@GITVM1>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
- Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 10:15:24 EST
- Sender: IBM TCP/IP List <IBMTCP-L@PUCC.BITNET>
- From: "David J. Buechner" <CC100DB@GITVM1.BITNET>
- Subject: Re: IBMLink
- In-Reply-To: Message of Thu,
- 17 Dec 1992 14:06:42 CET from <perezs@WORMS-EMH6.ARMY.MIL>
- Lines: 26
-
- On Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:06:42 CET Steve Perez said:
- >
- >As for commercial uses of the Internet....I have to admit that I didn't
- >consider this. I can see how making use of the configurators, sales info and
- >other marketing stuff could be seen as a violation of the spirit of Internet.
- >But I don't see the Internet community getting up in arms over something
- >like this (if I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will let me know).
- >
-
- I've heard this argument before, but I seem to remember some discussion
- somewhere that would lead me to believe that IBMLINK access via Internet
- wouldn't be considered "commercial use" of the net.
-
- As I remember, the logic went like this: If a vendor provided a service and
- provided *several* means of accessing that service and *one* of those means was
- via the Internet, then using the Internet doesn't count as "commercial" unless
- the vendor charges *extra* for Internet access specifically. Since we all
- pay for the IBMLINK userids, as long as there is no extra charge for Internet
- access it seems like IBM would be in the clear. Of course in my mind the other
- supporting argument is that there are several other vendors that provide
- support via Internet such as Sun.
-
-
- David Buechner
- Manager, IBM Systems Support
- Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
-